Select any two GPUs for comparison

Gaming Performance Comparison

Recommended System Requirements
Game Radeon R5 M220 Quadro FX 1600M
Cyberpunk 2077 2006% 2721%
Halo: Reach 387% 553%
Red Dead Redemption 2 1433% 1954%
Call of Duty: Modern Warfare 1433% 1954%
Doom Eternal 1218% 1666%
Dragon Ball Z Kakarot 846% 1167%
Microsoft Flight Simulator 2006% 2721%
FIFA 20 717% 994%
Need For Speed Heat 1433% 1954%
Grand Theft Auto VI 2242% 3038%

In terms of overall gaming performance, the graphical capabilities of the AMD Radeon R5 M220 are significantly better than the Nvidia Quadro FX 1600M.

The Radeon R5 M220 was released over three years more recently than the Quadro FX 1600M, and so the Radeon R5 M220 is likely to have far better driver support, meaning it will be much more optimized and ultimately superior to the Quadro FX 1600M when running the latest games.

The Radeon R5 M220 has 512 MB more video memory than the Quadro FX 1600M, so is likely to be much better at displaying game textures at higher resolutions. However, the overall memory performance is about the same.

The Quadro FX 1600M has 11.2 GB/sec greater memory bandwidth than the Radeon R5 M220, which means that the memory performance of the Quadro FX 1600M is slightly better than the Radeon R5 M220.

The Radeon R5 M220 has 320 Shader Processing Units but the Quadro FX 1600M does not have an entry, so the two GPUs cannot be reliably compared in this area.

The Radeon R5 M220 transistor size technology is 52 nm (nanometers) smaller than the Quadro FX 1600M. This means that the Radeon R5 M220 is expected to run massively cooler and achieve higher clock frequencies than the Quadro FX 1600M. While they exhibit similar graphical performance, the Radeon R5 M220 should consume less power than the Quadro FX 1600M.

The Radeon R5 M220 requires 17 Watts to run and the Quadro FX 1600M requires 50 Watts. The Quadro FX 1600M requires 33 Watts more than the Radeon R5 M220 to run. The difference is significant enough that the Quadro FX 1600M may have a slight adverse affect on your yearly electricity bills in comparison to the Radeon R5 M220.

Game FPS Benchmarks On Ultra

GPU Architecture

Core Speed550 MHzvs625 MHz
Boost Clock600 MHzvs-
ArchitectureJet PROG84M
OC Potential Fair vs -
Driver Support - vs -
Release Date01 Nov 2013vs01 Jun 2007
GPU LinkGD LinkGD Link

GPU Memory

Memory1024 MBvs512 MB
Memory Speed900 MHzvs800 MHz
Memory Bus64 Bitvs128 Bit
Memory TypeDDR3vsGDDR3
Memory Bandwidth14.4GB/secvs25.6GB/sec
L2 Cache - vs -
Delta Color Compression no vs no
Memory Performance 0% green tick vs green tick 0%

GPU Display

Shader Processing Units320vs-
Actual Shader Performance6%vs-
Texture Mapping Units20vs-
Texture Rate11 GTexel/svs-
Render Output Units8vs-
Pixel Rate4.4 GPixel/svs-

GPU Outputs

Max Digital Resolution (WxH)2560x1600vs2560x1600
VGA Connections0vs-
DVI Connections0vs-
HDMI Connections0vs-
DisplayPort Connections-vs-

GPU Power Requirements

Max Power17 Wattsvs50 Watts
Recommended PSU--

GPU Features

Shader Model5.0vs4.0
Open GL4.3vs2.1
Open CL-vs-
Notebook GPUyesyes

GPU Supporting Hardware

Recommended Processor--
Recommended RAM--
Maximum Recommended Gaming Resolution--

Gaming Performance Value

Performance Value

GPU Mini Review

Mini ReviewRadeon R5 M220 is an upcoming entry-level graphics card based on the 28nm, Graphics Core Next architecture.
It offers a core codenamed Jet PRO that packs 320 Shader Processing Units, 20 TMUs and 8 ROPs, on a 64-bit memory interface of DDR3. While the central unit runs at 550MHz and goes up to 600MHz, in Turbo Mode, the memory clock operates at 900MHz. The regular version should offer 1GB of video memory but expect to see gimmicks of up to 2GB.
Technically the successor to Radeon HD 6450M/Radeon HD 7450M, the new modified Core offers twice as much Shader Processing Units and thus R5 M220 will offer superior performance at DirectX 11 games. However, its still an overall weak card and so most demanding games will have to be playable at reduced settings.
The Quadro line of GPU cards emerged in an effort at market segmentation by NVIDIA. In introducing Quadro, NVIDIA was able to charge a premium for essentially the same graphics hardware in professional markets, and direct resources to properly serve the needs of those markets. To differentiate their offerings, NVIDIA used driver software and firmware to enable features vital to segments of the workstation market; e.g., high performance anti-aliased lines and two-sided lighting were reserved for the Quadro product. In addition, improved support through a certified driver program was put in place. These features were of little value in the gaming markets that NVIDIA's products already sold to, but prevented high end customers from using the less expensive products. This practice continues even today although some products use higher capacity faster memory.
Recommended CPU
Possible GPU Upgrades
GPU Variants